A (partially) on-chain wiki for Genesis


We would like to offer to the Genesis Alpha community the opportunity to experiment with new patterns of collaboration and co-creation by developing an extension to Alchemy (DAOstack frontend app) that includes an information repository (similar to a wiki) with which the Genesis participants can co-create and co-evolve valuable information of the DAO.

We call this wiki “the DAO’s Mind” and it will have significant differences with other typical wikis, as it will be built using the Underscore Protocol (_Prtcl) and customized for Genesis Alpha specific needs.

After having had great initial conversations about this idea with @Matan, @Fran @Kate @alexz and @orishim , we are posting this idea here to see how this resonates, discuss and get your feedback.

The _Prtcl

The _Prtcl is a content management protocol designed to facilitate open and efficient co-creation at scale. It’s inspired by GIT but is designed to work with ideas instead of code. Its development was motivated by the very same purpose as DAOstack: to boost collective intelligence.

The _Prtcl includes three killer features that make it especially well suited to power the DAO’s Mind:

  • Each page or section can have multiple “perspectives” (that’s what we call branches in the _Prtcl).

  • Pages or sections can be combined and nested to build larger information structures.

  • Perspectives and data can live in multiple platforms so that, for example, one page can have perspectives on a web server and also on the blockchain.

Our plan is to develop the DAO’s Mind as a web component that can be included inside the Alchemy app and would look and feel like a wiki, but with the important addition that, for each page or section, a “common” perspective will coexist with many other perspectives.

The “common” perspective would be governed on-chain by the Genesis DAO through special proposals that, when and if they pass, will update its content. Other perspectives would be personal and authors would be able to keep them private before making them formal “merge proposals” to the “common” perspective.

How it could look

Here is an example of how the integration might look like (not a final proposal at all).

The DAO’s Mind location and scheme

A new section is created for the DAO’s Mind and a new scheme is used to channel proposals that will update it.

The DAO’s Mind content

The DAO’s Mind content looks like a wiki, but each page have the “common” perspective, plus a number of other perspectives.

The personal space to edit proposals to the DAO’s Mind

New perspectives for pages and sections of the DAO’s Mind can be prepared on a separate environment where users can keep them private, reorganize them as they please, talk about them and receive notifications about the ones that are more relevant to them.

The plan

The steps we currently have in mind to move forward with this proposal are

  • Share it with the community and receive initial feedback.

  • Make a proposal to Genesis Alpha with a small budget (~500 USD) to cover for a detailed design of the module to be integrated into Alchemy, including wireframes and an overview of the solution to key technical problems. This work would be done together with the DAOstack dev team.

  • Make a proposal to DAOstack to help fund the development of the integration in the case the funds needed will exceed the capacity of Genesis Alpha.

  • We would like this to be production-ready and available to Genesis Alpha by the end of the year.


Hey Pepo,

I see this, which I would describe as a blockchain state managed wiki, as an absolute necessity for the future of Genesis. We are essentially doing this with the navigation hub, but this is obviously a less than ideal solution as it creates an off-chain monopoly for the aggregation of information.

Two additional features I would propose:

  • The ability to “merge minds” with another DAO by passing a proposal through both DAOs.
  • The ability to “copy a mind” from another DAO, that is, to “fork the mind.”

I would also propose that you look at already functional open-source dapps tackling the same issue, such as Lunyr or Kauri, that could perhaps be forked to provide a starting point for this project.


Thanks for the references @patdaostack, will definitely take a look.

Regarding your two proposals, I think they are both possible out-of-the-box!

The ability to “merge minds” with another DAO by passing a proposal through both DAOs.

Two DAO’s can have, for example, one “page” in common, and each DAO can govern its own “perspective” of that page. You will always have the possibility to merge the two to align them.

The ability to “copy a mind” from another DAO, that is, to “fork the mind.”

This is also possible. You create a new perspective (which is also a copy of the latest version) of the “DAO’s Mind” and make it governed by another DAO.

Note that in the _Prtcl, there are NOT special objects like “DAO’s MInds”, “Pages” or “Sections”. In the protocol they all are what we call “contexts”, and any “context” can be forked by anyone on any platform. Hence, you can fork a DAO’s Mind.

Great stuff. A couple questions:

-Will the content sections /pages within the DAO’s Mind be customizable? (these: http://prntscr.com/nzbrdl )
-I would imagine that each of these pages would have a different format /layout (for example: Meetups would look different than Code of Conduct). For this proposal, are you looking to create designs / functionality for all pages listed above, or a subset?

That’s exactly what we should think about next.

The list of sections is just a random mockup, not a proposal.

That kind of special pages are indeed possible and are precisely within the scope of building a customized version of the content editor.

A detailed design of this custom editor should include the list of pages that the DAO’s Mind includes, and their user experience. This is within the scope of the first “detailed design proposal” we are planning to make.

Great! Do you plan on working with existing Genesis members on this? Happy to volunteer :slight_smile:

Hi @eric.arsenault, yes! that would be great. I suggest we have an open call to sync on how this process could look like. What do you think?

This conversation has moved to a working group space in CollectiveOne. If you want to follow it or participate, please sign up to www.collectiveone.org and drop me (@pepo) a message.

Hello Genesis! :wave:

We will be reusing this thread to share the updates around the DAO’s Mind initiative from now on.


  • “Proof of feasibility” done and is looking good.

  • The overall strategy was reconsidered to give much more time and relevance to the UX research and design.

  • We worked out an ambitious 6 months UX Research and Development Plan as the path to Mainnet and are looking forward to starting working on it.

  • The plan has an overall cost of 53k USD distributed along 6 months and a sequence of 6 proposals of 8.85k USD each.

  • We will partner with dOrg to absorb most of the effort in terms of development.

  • We plan to make the next proposal on Alchemy, associated with the first phase of the plan, soon (this week).

Delivery of the current proposal

As some of you already know, we have reached the milestone associated with our first Genesis Proposal and the results are exciting: we have built a “proof of feasibility” of the integration from a technical perspective and an ambitious development plan with a strong emphasis around the UX research and development.

While we were originally considering to move faster in terms of UX design, and have some deliverables already at the end of this early phase, feedback from the community-led us to confirm that the UX challenges are key for this proposal and significantly reframe our strategy.

We decided to partner with Holon.cat who are experts in the field and with whom we created a 6 months UX Research and Development Plan that is both ambitious and realistic in terms of the complexity of what we want to achieve.

From the technical side, the work done these past weeks was extensive and deep, and we managed to identify and solve two of the key technical challenges of the integration: Making sure a DAO can update a perspective of the wiki, no matter how big it is, with a single proposal, and making sure our web-components can be integrated and connected with the rest of components inside Alchemy.

This video shows the results of this stage, it is longer than the one we tweeted and includes more details regarding the work done and the next steps

This document constitutes the formal delivery of the proposal and details the UX Research and Development Plan, including an overview of all phases and of the technical aspects.

(click on the image to open it)

UX Research and Development Plan

As mentioned above, the challenge of creating an _Prtcl-powered GIT-like co-creation flow on top of Alchemy to govern a wiki is significant and we think that it’s better to frame it that way. While the proof of concept we have built proves that our solution is feasible. Making a tool that people can use, that feels natural and intuitive and that solves a real problem is very challenging.

The UX Research and Development Plan is our proposed approach to tackle this challenge. It is divided in 5 phases with a significant dedication in terms of UX, UI experts, and software developers.

The plan is to request the funds needed for each phase at the beginning of that phase. We have created a baseline path, but the process is subject to change as the research advances and the tool is better specified.

Here is a summary of the time dedication we currently foresee for each phase and each role. The hourly rate applied for all three roles is 45 USD/hour.

Phase / Dedication in (hrs)



We believe that the _Prtcl integration into DAOstack could be strategic and impact the overall evolution of the project in the mid and long-term. It’s not a coincidence that _Prtcl was in fact inspired by the very same vision of DAOstack: open and scalable collaboration.

In this sense, we think that the integration of _Prtcl into DAOstack could, in the future, go beyond governing a Wiki. It could impact other aspects such as coordination tools, discussion, and debates, complex proposals submissions and domain decomposition of DAOs into sub-DAOs, among others.

We are aware that the funding requested represents a relevant effort from the community, but we think it is a reasonable effort for the kind of work that needs to be done and that it should result in higher returns for the Genesis Community and the DAOstack ecosystem in general.


We have been discussing with Jordan and Ori from dOrg about this initiative as it is linked with some of their own work and plans, and have decided that the best fit is that dOrg absorbs most of the load on the development part of this initiative as it will be DAOStack specific.

This way Pepo and Guillem from _Prtcl can focus on developing a general-purpose architecture for _Prtcl. Note that the funds from Genesis will only be used by the DAOStack specific work executed by dOrg, with a small part going to _Prtcl for the time devoted to supporting the work of dOrg.

:pray: Please let us know what you think!


I think it’s great you’re taking the time to do UX first. Definitely a good project for genesis, as far as I’m concerned.

I’d include a robust permissions framework, allowing for documents to be immutable, or changed only if a certain percentage of rep is voting for it, or changeable for a time period and not afterwards. There are probably other use cases I haven’t considered.

To be honest:

I don’t really care about doing research first: we need this feature now, and I want to see implementation fast-tracked, even if it’s ugly and hard to use.

We collectively should be the testers. I don’t see interviews in isolation giving information that’s a tenth as rich as Genesis using this today. Let us break this.

@pepo when can we expect a first implementation if we postpone the other elements?

Edit: I want to be clear I see value in the entire proposal – I think it’s awesome, in fact! – it’s just the order that strikes me as being wrong. While traditional apps need to be polished to the point of perfection, open-source applications don’t have the same standards for a first release. Genesis has a history of being willing and capable guinea pigs, and collectively, quite apt guinea pigs.

Great stuff! Happy to see this integration progress to the next stage

I agree, there is a need for good UX, but 8 weeks of full time UX work seems like overkill. I feel like I could whip something up in 1 week ¯_(ツ)_/¯

I agree with @patdaostack above: let’s get it live, test it in a real environment, and iterate / change things if we need to. If we need some minor UX changes, we can probably deal with it internally within the Genesis community for much less time, by people who already know the tools and vision.

I feel you. Lets see if there are inputs from others. In the meanwhile we will think about the options we have that are still realistic and come back to you.